Hi Geert,
On Monday, 17 September 2018 12:48:12 EEST Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 11:09 AM Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Monday, 17 September 2018 11:51:06 EEST Simon Horman wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 11:38:43AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>> On Monday, 17 September 2018 10:50:55 EEST Simon Horman wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:10:43PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>>>> The R8A77990 (E3) platform has one RGB output and two LVDS outputs
> >>>>> connected to the DU. Add the DT nodes for the DU, LVDS encoders
> >>>>> and supporting VSP and FCP.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart
> >>>>> <laurent.pinchart+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>> Tested-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>
> >>>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi | 167 +++++++++++++++++
> >>>>> 1 file changed, 167 insertions(+)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi
> >>>>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi index
> >>>>> abb14af76c0e..600074ca3ee5 100644
> >>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi
> >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi
> >>>>> @@ -537,6 +537,173 @@
> >>>>> resets = <&cpg 408>;
> >>>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> These nodes should be placed after the gic to preserve the sorting
> >>>> of nodes by bus address and then IP block.
> >>>
> >>> Aren't they already ? :-)
> >>
> >> Git didn't seem to think so. But its not a big deal,
> >> I can fix this up locally.
> >
> > Did it apply the below hunk to a different location ? 408 is the gic,
> > isn't it ?
>
> The "-U <n>" option (with <n> sufficiently large) of "git diff" and "git
> show" is a great help for inspecting DT changes.
I know. This is what I have in my tree:
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/
renesas/r8a77990.dtsi
index abb14af76c0e..935bb313d29f 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi
@@ -522,32 +522,199 @@
gic: interrupt-controller@f1010000 {
compatible = "arm,gic-400";
#interrupt-cells = <3>;
#address-cells = <0>;
interrupt-controller;
reg = <0x0 0xf1010000 0 0x1000>,
<0x0 0xf1020000 0 0x20000>,
<0x0 0xf1040000 0 0x20000>,
<0x0 0xf1060000 0 0x20000>;
interrupts = <GIC_PPI 9
(GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(2) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>;
clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 408>;
clock-names = "clk";
power-domains = <&sysc 32>;
resets = <&cpg 408>;
};
+ vspb0: vsp@fe960000 {
+ compatible = "renesas,vsp2";
+ reg = <0 0xfe960000 0 0x8000>;
+ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 266 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+ clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 626>;
+ power-domains = <&sysc R8A77990_PD_ALWAYS_ON>;
+ resets = <&cpg 626>;
+ renesas,fcp = <&fcpvb0>;
+ };
[snip]
so I don't see where the problem that Simon pointed out is, especially given
that I took care to sort nodes out properly this time.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
